Once Again, Scientific Evidence Supports Bulletproof/paleo/high-Fat

1567810

Comments

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    It's very healthy activity just so we are clear, anyone that says otherwise needs to be dealt with high caution.




     


    I believe that it's inflammatory from my own experience. What does this mean, "needs to be dealt with high-caution?" Are you seriously putting me on some alternative health terrorist watch list?

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    Here's a nice little explanation of carb and fat metabolism broken down into basic terms for those not interested in spending the time to learn in great detail. Before someone screams "HORMONES", they are a part of, not separate from, calories out.





    This is patently not the interpretation of the science that Dave subscribes to. This is not my experience or really anyone's experience who's eaten excess calories in the form of fat. If I'm understanding it correctly, you're saying fat makes you fat. The current Paleo/high-fat movement (which is incidentally one of the keywords in the title of this thread), which is based on good research and experience, purports that indeed, fat does not make you fat.

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    Because calories are not in surplus, even a basic terms video is too hard for you?  Ohh...nevermind.




     


    I've learned to see past statements like this and not let them phase me at all, even though they're incredibly rude, because I have no recourse except to "take it" because moderators on this site always seem to side with you (or you are a moderator, I'm not sure). But really, honestly, I'm done being affected by it.


     


    The rest of your statement had substance, however. What I'm saying is that this model is in conflict with what has been said about insulin resistance. No, I don't research this stuff all day, but this video is essentially too basic. He didn't even say "once you hit caloric surplus, this is what happens to carbs, and this is what happens to fat." I don't think it's this simple, either. It doesn't take hormones into play at all. From my understanding of the "basic" picture is that glucose is the major issue, and insulin decides where to shuttle nutrients. Glucose could go into muscles or fat cells. I'm not exactly sure how it decides that (a complex interaction of hormones). I do know that when there's excess glucose floating around from someone eating too many carbs and being insulin-resistant, the excess generally gets stored in fat cells. In general, in the presence of insulin, doesn't this happen? 

  • John BrissonJohn Brisson The Legend Formerly Known as Ron Swanson ✭✭✭

    No one here is talking about the gut, it has a lot to do with this.


    My book Fix Your Gut, is offered on Amazon for $9.99.

     

    I also offer coaching:  http://fixyourgut.com/health-coaching-information/

     

    Please join or like the Fix your Gut Facebook. Also please add me on twitter @FixYourGutJB.

     

    http://www.fixyourgut.com

     

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    As we've already covered before, science doesn't care what you believe, the literature is quite clear that all health markers improve with regular cardiovascular activity, steady state just means literally one speed, moving at one speed or many different speeds does not imply danger in any sense, it's the healthy regular activity that improves health markers.


    Dealt with caution simply means that you should be cautious listening to someone that says that a known healthy activity is dangerous or unhealthy, as they are likely to say many other things that are very suspect and unsupported, like calories aren't real for instance haha.




     


    I'm talking about what has been called "aerobics" specifically (as defined by Richard Simmons). Shooting for 65-85% for 15-45 minutes, what have you. When I've seen people saying "steady-state cardio," this is generally what they mean. Sorry if I've gotten the nomenclature wrong. I do not agree that this is a healthy activity for everyone. People suffering from toxicity particularly have difficulty with this kind of activity. It just wears us down. Notice I don't say exercise, because this kind of activity doesn't fit the definition of exercise I prescribe to. It exists in this nebulous wasteland of pointlessness.


     


    "There are five keys to Bulletproof exercise. Make it:



    Brief

    Intense

    Infrequent

    Safe

    Purposeful"


     


    Read more about it, of course, in Body by Science. Anything else that calls itself exercise, especially since it makes me feel sick and inflamed, as opposed to invigorated and detoxed, I do not recommend to anyone, because it's a waste of time.


     


    Oh, and walking is fine of course, just in case you haven't picked that up.

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    No one here is talking about the gut, it has a lot to do with this.




    Then talk about it bro-son! 

  • John BrissonJohn Brisson The Legend Formerly Known as Ron Swanson ✭✭✭
    edited July 2016


    An excellent explanation. I've seen so much blind adherence to "activated charcoal cleanses toxins from the body" without reference to how the toxins end up in the digestive system from elsewhere (like the fat or the blood). Activated charcoal follows a pretty straightforward path through the body, so toxins have to be placed in this path somehow. 


     


    Any idea on toxin excretion percentages vs metabolic re-uptake? Does excretion increase with exercise as it would for water-soluble toxins? 


     


    Another concern is determining that there are actually any toxins in your fat cells to begin with, which is why I try and ask people what toxins they are trying to detox. Is there a general list of toxins lurking in most people's fat cells that require an activated charcoal regimen?


     


     


    I believe there was some discussion during the Moldy Q&A about certain mold-related toxins secreted in the bile not being easily bound up by charcoal and needing more specifically targeted drugs to bind the bile, like the anti-cholesterol one Dave mentioned (I'll fill in the name if I can find my notes) or something like glucomannan or modified citrus pectin, otherwise they would remain dissolved and reabsorbed in a continuous cycle. Unfortunately I could not get Dave to answer or acknowledge any of my questions during the Q&A, so all I have are scribbled notes from his brief mention of a few of the "Asprey Cocktail" ingredients. 


     


     


    As someone who is beginning the hard work to recover from living in an environment that has air that could be considered clinically toxic, it's important to know what toxins you are dealing with, where they are in your system, what to use to bind and eliminate them safely, and how to target your detox regimen (when to take your sups, how to promote toxin excretion, any supplement interactions so you don't waste money binding your other sups or have an adverse reaction, that kind of thing).




     


    I typed a response a week ago but my daughter messed with the computer and deleted it haha.


     


    We do not have a lot of data on toxin reabsorption but we know that it occur because of enterohepatic circulation. Some toxins that are released from the liver from bile would get reabsorbed when the bile does. Some medications hinder enterohepatic circulation and in doing so may cause injury to the gastrointestinal system. Some drugs might be used twice or more by the body by going through enterohepatic circulation which could have negative effects (bad for liver toxic medications.)


     


    BPA seems hard to reduce in the body because of enterohepatic circulation: http://www.karenhurd.com/kh-assets/kh-textfiles/EnterohepaticRecirculation.pdf.


     


    The body releases it from fat cells and into bile, it gets reabsorbed and goes back to the liver. It either enters systemic circulation and gets redistributed somewhere else OR gets sent through the biliary system again.


     


    Exercise would increase detox by increasing motility. We mostly again lose our toxins from number ones and number twos, occasionally a number three. Occasionally, our body needs a little help in eliminating toxins or heavy metals, it can do it on its own most of the time but can be slow doing so.


    My book Fix Your Gut, is offered on Amazon for $9.99.

     

    I also offer coaching:  http://fixyourgut.com/health-coaching-information/

     

    Please join or like the Fix your Gut Facebook. Also please add me on twitter @FixYourGutJB.

     

    http://www.fixyourgut.com

     

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭


    Anything else that calls itself exercise, especially since it makes me feel sick and inflamed, as opposed to invigorated and detoxed, I do not recommend to anyone, because it's a waste of time.




    This is what Jason Miller meant.

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭


    BPA seems hard to reduce in the body because of enterohepatic circulation: http://www.karenhurd.com/kh-assets/kh-textfiles/EnterohepaticRecirculation.pdf.




    I for one am glad that I haven't been exposed to large quantities of BPA (that I know of). Is there a basic test for BPA accumulation in the body?


     


     




    The body releases it from fat cells and into bile, it gets reabsorbed and goes back to the liver. It either enters systemic circulation and gets redistributed somewhere else OR gets sent through the biliary system again.




    So this is the point at which things need to be bound up and eliminated, if you are in fact dealing with these types of toxins. I wonder if there is any medication that specifically uses this process to stick around longer?


     




    Exercise would increase detox by increasing motility. We mostly again loose our toxins from number ones and number twos, occasionally a number three. Occasionally, our body needs a little help in eliminating toxins or heavy metals, it can do it on its own most of the time but can be slow doing so.




    A major pain in the rear is trying to utilize something like activated charcoal during a workout to take advantage of said increased motility. Not only do you need to target digestion time, the activated charcoal might also be binding some of the other workout supplements you want to take! Especially concerning if you have time constraints and need to knock out as many things at once as you can.

  • ACH85ACH85 ✭✭


    Glucose could go into muscles or fat cells. 




     


    Or glycogen stores, if they are not yet full. 


     


     




    I'm not exactly sure how it decides that (a complex interaction of hormones). I do know that when there's excess glucose floating around from someone eating too many carbs and being insulin-resistant, the excess generally gets stored in fat cells. In general, in the presence of insulin, doesn't this happen? 




     


    From what I can tell, the body "decides" where to put glucose based on which "tanks" could use more energy... a lot like is described in the video. The hormones actions are mediated by the body's overall energy balance. 


     


    Insulin is released by the pancreas in response to sugar in the blood stream - the GLUT2 transporters of the islet cells are "always on" waiting for blood sugar. A muscle that has been recently worked out expresses the GLUT4 transporter, insulin not required, but insulin also causes muscle and fat cells to express GLUT4. And liver glycogen stores (if not full) also readily accept glucose - in the presence of insulin. So yes, hormones (insulin) are involved, but their effects are determined by whether or not the "tanks are full." Post workout, when the "tanks are low," the blood sugar will begin going into muscle cells immediately, and also trigger islet cells to release insulin, but then more blood sugar will be shuttled to glycogen stores that need refilling, and once it's been reduced insulin will go back down. All told, the muscle and glycogen "tanks" will take up the majority of this glucose and not much will end up in fat. 


     


    This is why I can slam 100g of fast-acting carbs after a big workout and see only a moderate and brief increase in blood glucose as measured by a glucometer, but the same meal without the workout creates a much bigger and longer spike, during which those carbs are more likely to be shuttled into fat cells, and likelier still if my glycogen stores are full. That's when the excess blood sugar starts going into fat cells. 


     


    So for your last sentence I quoted, the key seems to be "excess" glucose and "too many" carbs. It's not excess/too many if the tanks need refilling. 


     


    All this to say I generally agree a strict-ish interpretation of BP works for people who are sedentary and well-fed (full tanks) but people who want to exercise need to start making adjustments beyond strict BP. And people who come to BP from an underfed (tanks are low) state may also run into trouble, and I believe would be better served by a higher carb period. 

  • Haha, just listened to the latest Quantified Body podcast, after a long super sciencey discussion of biochemistry and fat soluble vitamins, Chris Masterjohn says that if he were to make a recommendation to the general public of one thing to track it would be......caloric intake! (Followed by macros).
  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    Haha, just listened to the latest Quantified Body podcast, after a long super sciencey discussion of biochemistry and fat soluble vitamins, Chris Masterjohn says that if he were to make a recommendation to the general public of one thing to track it would be......caloric intake! (Followed by macros).




     


    Lol, boo! Another one bites the dust.

  • ACH85ACH85 ✭✭
    edited July 2016


    Haha, just listened to the latest Quantified Body podcast, after a long super sciencey discussion of biochemistry and fat soluble vitamins, Chris Masterjohn says that if he were to make a recommendation to the general public of one thing to track it would be......caloric intake! (Followed by macros).




     


    Masterjohn also recently posted a "What I eat" article in which he mentions eating a minimum of 100g carbs at breakfast on days he works out. So much for IF. This is to support a crossfit style workout:


     



     


     


    To be clear, I did not restrict fat during my period of weight loss because I think that restricting fat is superior for weight loss than restricting other calories. I focused on restricting fat during that period because I found that my CrossFit workouts were causing me to need an amount of carbohydrate that I would not be able to get while restricting calories unless I biased my restriction of calories towards restricting fat.

     


    So he's maintaining a set caloric intake, eating deliberately to power his workouts, (eating to perform?) and therefore has to swap some fat calories for carb calories... maybe this Jason Miller character is on to something? 


     


     


    Unrelated-ish, and what will make this only my second post involving sloths, I recently read this Motherboard article on sloth evolution where it mentions those lazy bastards have a daily metabolic burn of only 110 calories per day! Basically one potato. I didn't think it warranted it's own post, even in Gangster Banter, but I think it's interesting to point out: if your diet is primarily low-calorie leafy greens, you'll become slow and lazy. So slow you could have a cardinal sin named after you.


     


    In people for whom ketones kill hunger to the point of making it an unreliable metric for food intake, as they seem to for me, this is important to remember. When I went too low calorie accidentally, I was low-energy and slothful without even realizing it. Calories can be about energy and quality of life, not just body composition. Eat nutritionally and calorically dense foods and perhaps even count calories to make sure you don't end up like this guy:


    tumblr_nxvtivD4WF1ry6gggo1_1280.png


  • Would anyone like to comment on the 'carbs make you hungry' statement/myth. 


     


    Ever since I started become more and more conscious of what I eat and how it makes me feel; and ever since I for the most part "fixed" my gut and metabolism I have noticed that carbs no longer make me hungry almost no matter what the carb source is. No matter what I eat for breakfast whether its BPC; a bowl of wheat berries, honey, and whey; or eggs and bacon; or nothing or any combination I typically am not hungry and eat lunch out of habit. Its not like I have to force my lunch down, but its not like all I can think about in the morning is my hunger and food.


     


    Are those of you who consciously eat more carbs to fuel performance really get anymore hungry after eating carbs or workouts? If you are on a good scheduled in terms of timing meals and training does that affect hunger? Is the idea still to use calorie and macro tracking to start to be able to train your own sense of when you need to eat?


     


    And to sort of stay on topic for a little bit. MLS it looked like you were headed towards the darkside, but Im glad something in you decides to stick with it, you truly are the embodiment of the BP dogma. 


    Make, [then,] thyself to grow to the same stature as the Greatness which transcends all measure; leap forth from every body; transcend all Time; become Eternity; and [thus] shalt thou know God. Conceiving nothing is impossible unto thyself, think thyself deathless and able to know all,—all arts, all sciences, the way of every life.  – Corpus Hermeticum XI “The Mind of Hermes”

  • ACH85ACH85 ✭✭


    Would anyone like to comment on the 'carbs make you hungry' statement/myth. 


     


    ...


     


    Are those of you who consciously eat more carbs to fuel performance really get anymore hungry after eating carbs or workouts? If you are on a good scheduled in terms of timing meals and training does that affect hunger? Is the idea still to use calorie and macro tracking to start to be able to train your own sense of when you need to eat?




     


    Carbs around exercise don't make me hungry. If I'm eating well they don't away from exercise either. But if I have a rare cheat-day style dalliance, I do get hungry from lots of carbs, which I believe correlates to blood sugar dropping back down to the 100 mg/dL-ish level from much higher levels, 2-4 hours after the carbs. But I am aware it is sort of a false hunger, just a message from my stomach saying "feed me" not a reliable signal from my body for nutrition. Understanding that subtle difference took time and tracking, though. 


     


    I think the idea is to use calorie and macro tracking as 1) an occasional check-in to make sure my intake seems sensible, or 2) during muscle gain or a fat cut to achieve a desired difference in energy balance despite hunger telling me to eat more or less. Because I have a setup to easily track what I eat most days, I also use it to 3) be able to look back at my nutrition, exercise, and body composition in the past, if I want to recreate a change or just check where I was a year ago. 

Sign In or Register to comment.